CV-18 Fujian has just arrived at Qingdao naval base. This will be the first time where both CV-16 Liaoning (currently moored at the base) and CV-18 Fujian are seen together. Posted by @foolsball on Twitter.
CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Engineer
Major
It is illogical to assume a derivative of Kuznetsov class is going to have massive internal structural alteration.
It is a hard pill to swallow, but when you look at size comparison of satellite imageries, the 003 is only like 15 meters longer. That is not enough for even one extra row of aircraft storage space.
An increase of 20,000 tons sounds like a lot, but it isn't for a big ship and here is why: displacement is volume, and volume increases by the cube. Hangar space is surface area, and surface area increases by the square. When enlarging a big ship, volume increases much faster than surface area.
The J-15's wingspan is only 7.4 m when folded, and the J-35's is about 9 m when folded. Parking them in a staggered formation in a single row should be no problem at all.
Also need to take into consideration that there is no space taken up by AShM silos unlike the Kuznetsov.
Engineer
Major
LMAO. I can't help but laugh everytime I see stuff like this. The image you've attached does not show "staggered formation" but jig-saw puzzle formation, dreamt up by the deranged. Aircraft can't be parked like that in a real-life because they need extra space to be maneuvered into position. The figure is also wrong because it shows the rear bulkhead too far back, when in reality there is only space for one row of J-15 aft of the rear hangar door.
Now, if you want entertainment, I do have an even better one:
A total length increase from bow-to-sterm of 15 meters is not going translate into 15 meters of extra hangar length. A hangar with length of half the ship would see a porportional increase like 7 meters. However, on the 003, there is also the fire doors in the middle of the hangar, which takes up like 5 meters of hangar length. There isn't room for one more row of aircraft.
Last edited:
Engineer
Major
No consideration for that needs to be taken, because the forward bulkhead of the hangar is just forward of the front hangar door. This issue has long been settled.
I was only pointing out the logical flaw in your previous post, but somehow you seem to have taken offense. If you don't like my response, perhaps next time you'll be more thorough in your reasoning.LMAO. I can't help but laugh everytime I see stuff like this. The image you've attached does not show "staggered formation" but jig-saw puzzle formation, dreamt up by the deranged. Aircraft can't be parked like that in a real-life because they need extra space to be maneuvered into position. The figure is also wrong because it shows the rear bulkhead too far back, when in reality there is only space for one row of J-15 aft of the rear hangar door.
Now, if you want entertainment, I do have an even better one:
A total length increase from bow-to-sterm of 15 meters is not going translate into 15 meters of extra hangar length. A hangar with length of half the ship would see a porportional increase like 7 meters. However, on the 003, there is also the fire doors in the middle of the hangar, which takes up like 5 meters of hangar length. There isn't room for one more row of aircraft.
Plus, I don't see anything particularly surprising about using the extra length primarily to extend the hangar. After all, “space” is the easiest thing to add.
Engineer
Major
I was only pointing out the logical flaw in your retort, but somehow you seem to have taken offense. If you don't like my response, perhaps next time you'll be double check your own reasoning before accusing others of being illogical.
Obviously, you didn't seem them, otherwise I wouldn't need to point them out.
Engineer
Major
Nothing I said there is wrong. 15 meters increase in overall ship length isn't the same as increasing the hangar by 15 meters, let alone to the point of fitting one extra row of aircraft when length of one J-15 is like 21 meters. You then started talking about aircraft width which has nothing to do with length. Perhaps you should have looked at comparisons of satellite imageries first.